Multimillionaire JK Rowling moved almost to tears by new Harry Potter Encyclopedia

Trancendental

Trancendental

CAGiversary!
Feedback
4 (100%)
J.K. Rowling says her efforts to halt a publisher's "Harry Potter" lexicon have been crushing her creativity.
Rowling says she has stopped work on a new novel. She says her federal court case has "decimated my creative work over the last month."
Rowling is suing RDR Books to stop publication of Steven Vander Ark's "Harry Potter Lexicon."
She told the court on Monday: "This book constitutes wholesale theft of 17 years of my hard work."
RDR's lawyer, Anthony Falzone, defends the lexicon as a reference guide. Falzone calls it a legal effort "to organize and discuss the complicated and very elaborate world of Harry Potter."
When Rowling's lawyer asked how she felt about Harry, she replied: "I really don't want to cry." But she looked like she was about to do just that.
Click to expand...

What's a matter JK, the millions for writing pop trash weren't enough, you had to go after 'fair use' as well?

Oh brother :roll:
 
Idiot. Didn't you know that creating something this massive would eventually spawn a life of its own? Just let it happen J.K. There is nothing you can do to stop it.
 
"Creativity"?

The Harry Potter story has been told over and over, throughout the ages.
 
To sorta tie-in your other thread recently...

J.K. Rowling treats her fanbase far worse than Lucas.

With Lucas, at least he allows his fans to run with the universe.

Her efforts to prevent the encyclopedia from being released has prevented her from working on other projects?

Meaning, she doesn't have any ideas for a follow-up to her multi-million dollar franchise so she blames something else to cast doubt away from her abilities as a writer.
 
Who the fuck cares? How is an encyclopedia of shit she's already written going to somehow affect future writings, the story, or its sales? Are people going to buy the encyclopedia instead or something? Jesus. Writing about what you wrote is not stealing what you wrote.

I don't understand why some of these super-rich people get so pissy about stuff like this. I swear to god if I was writing books that made millions of dollars I wouldn't give a shit about anything. I would've already quit writing that shit and would be sitting on my ass living off of interest anyway.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']At least lucas allows encyclopedias and other books to be published. She's the richest woman in the UK, geez.[/quote]

Yeah, I guess you have to give him credit for that aspect. He even hosts them at Comic-Con....basically a ton of star wars movie afficianados (sp) with their own home made movies.
 
I would've already quit writing that shit and would be sitting on my ass living off of interest anyway.

But see...what's hardwired inside people like Rowling that gets them to that point of nearly inexhaustible wealth is what keeps them going...and going. For them, it isn't about making a mind-boggling amount of money in as short a period as possible and then retiring. Perhaps she's overreacting, but I think it's genuine defensiveness.

It will be intriguing to see how the last two--well, three, actually--films do now that people know the entire story arc in advance. It will also be interesting to see if she pulls a "Kevin Smith" and goes back to the same universe she said she was done with, and whether that's sooner than later. I'm sure someone out there is trying to get her to do the "Harry Potter" version of The Hardy Boys, each book a self-contained adventure, taking the three protagonists on the road, and all over the world (read: "Harry Potter in America...it'll be huge, kiddo!")

P.S. I think Lucas only allows fans to 'do their thing' so as to keep the Star Wars mindshare elevated (which equals more merchandising revenue) and to allow the fanfic to make the Prequels look "impressive...most impressive" by way of comparison.

EDIT: And if she does want to keep all future Potter literature minimized and official, I don't see the problem with her being protective of it. I'm sure many of the people bashing her here are the same people that applaud Bill Watterson for not allowing Calvin & Hobbes to turn into a crass, abused merchandise machine.
 
[quote name='terribledeli']To sorta tie-in your other thread recently...

J.K. Rowling treats her fanbase far worse than Lucas.

With Lucas, at least he allows his fans to run with the universe.[/quote]

I think you may be right.

Lucas may be stubborn and elitest. However I do get the sense that Lucas is motivated by his artistic vision and he respects others who wish to use his work to express themselves in an creative manner.

I think JK probably started writing as a fun project but at this point she seems motivated more by greed and absolute control then anything else. It's too bad that this role model for kids is acting like a spoiled rich brat having a tantrum.
 
I'm disappointed in her really all around; especially after book 2 when she started going after the Fanfiction crew... I gotta agree Lucas is much better to his fans.

Though I really have to ask; what exactly does one do with a 'Harry Potter Encyclopedia'? I can't remember the last time I picked up a REAL one; so what would a HP one do for the people exactly?
 
She said when this whole thing first started that she was planning to write her own encyclopedia. The real reason she is suing is so that people buy her's and she makes more money.
 
[quote name='Rocko']I believe she's said in the past she plans on releasing a HP encyclopedia.

I could be wrong, though.[/quote]
Not any more!

She said she was not sure if she had "the will or the heart" to now publish her own encyclopedia.
Click to expand...
:lol: The humanity!
 
[quote name='Brak']"Creativity"?

The Harry Potter story has been told over and over, throughout the ages.[/quote]

true . as i recall in the 80s there was a tv series on hbo about a school for witches. david bowie was in it. and it was set in a castle.


and there was a character called harry potter in troll.
 
[quote name='daphatty']Idiot. Didn't you know that creating something this massive would eventually spawn a life of its own? Just let it happen J.K. There is nothing you can do to stop it.[/quote]


She needs to realize her fanbase is just as rabid as Star Trek (include me in that) or Star Wars and use it as a tool instead of fighting it. To say it is crushing her creativity on her new novel is bogus.
 
[quote name='Rocko']I believe she's said in the past she plans on releasing a HP encyclopedia.

I could be wrong, though.[/quote]

I read that somewhere too.
 
She has over a billion dollars.

Anyways she comes off as an asshole.

The whole article I read was "What they wrote was garbage, but it's better than what I wrote so now I'm not sure I want to write/finish my own Harry Potter encyclopedia".

fuck you you god damn soul-less piece of shit cunt.
 
[quote name='Liquid 2']fuck rich people and especially fuck 'em when they want to retain control over what they've created!


:roll:[/QUOTE]

I'm all about artists and authors retaining control over what they create. However, Rowling here really has no case under modern copyright law. From every source I've read, this encyclopedia just acts as a reference to the books, and thus is not an infringement of her copyrights. I don't think it even includes direct quotes from the books. Thus, the only thing it's "copying" from Rowling is her ideas, not her expression, and is thus not protectable under copyright. I don't have a problem with rich people protecting their rights, I have a problem with frivolous lawsuits.

Slate magazine did a nice write-up of the legal issues here (http://www.slate.com/id/2181776/).
 
[quote name='strummerbs']I'm all about artists and authors retaining control over what they create. However, Rowling here really has no case under modern copyright law. From every source I've read, this encyclopedia just acts as a reference to the books, and thus is not an infringement of her copyrights. I don't think it even includes direct quotes from the books. Thus, the only thing it's "copying" from Rowling is her ideas, not her expression, and is thus not protectable under copyright. I don't have a problem with rich people protecting their rights, I have a problem with frivolous lawsuits.

Slate magazine did a nice write-up of the legal issues here (http://www.slate.com/id/2181776/).[/QUOTE]

That's makes sense.

I just can't understand why nearly everybody in this thread seems to hate her simply for her success, especially when many of them (I'm sure) have enjoyed her books.



Posts like these blow me away:
[quote name='Illini Jeeper']Bitch, bitch, bitch.... friggin woman.[/QUOTE]
[quote name='big daddy']She has over a billion dollars.

Anyways she comes off as an asshole.

fuck you you god damn soul-less piece of shit cunt.[/QUOTE]
[quote name='Inufaye']Money Grabbing Bitch.[/QUOTE]
[quote name='Dead of Knight']What a dumb bitch. Yes, cry, cry over your mountain of money.[/QUOTE]
 
I don't read Harry Potter books nor have I seen the movies. I can appreciate the fact that she was able to write and be successful. HOWEVER, this just seems to further exemplify how power-hungry she's gotten once success started. Look at the development of the Harry Potter section of Universal Studios Islands of Adventure, which started from a power-control issue with Disney.

So that Disney could then close a deal with this rather demanding author and acquire all of the theme park rights to the Harry Potter characters.

So then ... When word came back from Glendale that Rowling was making unrealistic demands, that the various items that she was insisting on including as part of Phase One of Disney's Harry Potter park would just make this project fiscally irresponsible as well as an operational nightmare ... It was Iger who then reportedly made the decision that the company shouldn't continue to pursue this deal. That it would be far better for all parties involved -- if they couldn't agree on what show elements should be included in the Potter project -- that Disney & Rowling just abandon this negotiation.

The key to making this project affordable (Which -- given the enormous licensing fees that both J.K. Rowling and Warner Bros. are demanding as well as that huge cut of this area's merchandising money that Universal allegedly had to surrender -- is a real challenge) is that Universal Creative already had the good strong bones of IOA's "Lost Continent" area to build upon.
Click to expand...
Source

You know you have a problem when the Disney Company (which I'm a fan of) won't even take on your ideas, which would make them a ton of money, because of how much control you demand.

I guess my problem with it is that she wouldn't be where she is today without her fans and it seems like she's putting herself above them. She's willing to start a frivolous legal action against a book publishing company over ideas and she's putting her "baby" in what will always be a 2nd tier theme park just so she can have creative control. I might even look the other way on the theme park thing if she had some sort of experience in that particular industry. It just seems like a really arrogant move to basically say that I alone know what's best for my characters and you people with years of successful operations don't have a clue.

Even George Lucas knew Disney was the place to go with his Star Wars sagas. Talk about success... a ride in almost every Disney theme park around the world (Disneyland, Walt Disney World, Tokyo Disney, and Disneyland Paris), a "Jedi Training Academy" attraction for younger kids in Disneyland and Disney World, boatloads of merchandise sales, and 4 weekends in June devoted to the series called "Star Wars Weekends." Lucas knew which company could do it best and retained some control, but otherwise stood back and let the pros do their jobs.
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']She needs to realize her fanbase is just as rabid as Star Trek (include me in that) or Star Wars and use it as a tool instead of fighting it. To say it is crushing her creativity on her new novel is bogus.[/quote]

it's called excuses for writer's block:roll:
 
[quote name='Liquid 2']That's makes sense.

I just can't understand why nearly everybody in this thread seems to hate her simply for her success, especially when many of them (I'm sure) have enjoyed her books.



Posts like these blow me away:[/quote]


It's schadenfreude, pleasure in the misery of others. That doesn't excuse it, but a lot of people love to engage in it because it makes them feel better for whatever reason. While I think the fact she was near tears was a bit much, especially considering where she was before she met fame, I haven't heard any legitimate reason for hating her and calling her a bitch. She isn't Rosie O'Donnell.
 
[quote name='Liquid 2']That's makes sense.

I just can't understand why nearly everybody in this thread seems to hate her simply for her success, especially when many of them (I'm sure) have enjoyed her books.



Posts like these blow me away:[/QUOTE]

I completely agree. However, her money does have some serious relevance here. Basically, she has the ability, through sheer monetary muscle, to pay attorneys enough money to keep litigation going, even without serious legal merit. At the end of the day, the creators of the encyclopedia are going to face a serious decision of whether they can afford to be legally right in this matter.
 
[quote name='rabbitt']I'd be more concerned about the publication of the shitty movies myself.[/quote]

For real. If she's worried about her vision being compromised or her creativity ripped off, she should be upset about how badly the movies condense, rush, and butcher the stories. An encyclopedia is nothing compared to that.
 
She started writing the books originally as a way to - she had hoped - provide for her family. My understanding is that she was poverty stricken at times in her adult life and even homeless. I imagine the overwhelming undercurrent in her mind is that anything she can do now to help secure a prosperous living for her family and any children/grandchildren/etc is a good thing.

Also, whether anyone realizes it or not, if you sat there and developed a world with characters for some 17 years of your life, and watched it grow from a simple 200 page novel into the fictional universe it is now, you too would have emotional investment in it. Everyone here is acting like "Oh it's just a story" (there are variants and tangents usually attached to this statement, such as "I think the characters suck" or some other similar negativity). To her - and most likely to a good portion of the more rabid fans - it's a little more than that. And yes, I realize how silly and insane that sounds. But to her, at least, these characters represent a rather visible and measurable part of her life. Don't sit there and pretend you'd simply treat something like this as "only a book" or something equally benign.

So like it or not, her thinking right now is that she is protecting something she gave life to. She wants to keep it evolving in such a way as she sees fit, and if that includes taking down projects that might potentially ruin whatever purity she's striving to keep, then she'll do it.

Note that I am NOT giving her a pass on this, because there are times when it's overstepping your bounds and attempting to use some kind of obscure law or money to uphold something, even if you know you're wrong. I imagine strummer is the most educated on legal matters in this thread, so I'm going to take whatever he says as the most directly true.

This means that - unlike Lucas, since that seems to be the popular comparison in here - she really is doing more harm than good. She's going after some fans who probably aren't doing anything honestly wrong, she's making (probably) asinine requests simply for her own good, and she's trying to run everything about her creation as if she honestly has the ability to do that.

But don't say she hasn't tried to appease some fans or appeal to her fanbase amiably. What about the near endless amount of talks and speeches she had to give in order to answer questions about all sorts of things last year? She could just as easily avoid doing such things, but at least she does and has and probably still will. I guess everyone is only looking at all the dumb things she's doing, and maybe they overpower whatever good she's done. I don't know.

Maybe she is money grubbing at this point and has let greed overtake the original intent for her writing, which was pure survival. I don't really know since I'm not paying as close enough attention as some others seem to be.
 
[quote name='Strell']She started writing the books originally as a way to - she had hoped - provide for her family. My understanding is that she was poverty stricken at times in her adult life and even homeless. I imagine the overwhelming undercurrent in her mind is that anything she can do now to help secure a prosperous living for her family and any children/grandchildren/etc is a good thing.

Also, whether anyone realizes it or not, if you sat there and developed a world with characters for some 17 years of your life, and watched it grow from a simple 200 page novel into the fictional universe it is now, you too would have emotional investment in it. Everyone here is acting like "Oh it's just a story" (there are variants and tangents usually attached to this statement, such as "I think the characters suck" or some other similar negativity). To her - and most likely to a good portion of the more rabid fans - it's a little more than that. And yes, I realize how silly and insane that sounds. But to her, at least, these characters represent a rather visible and measurable part of her life. Don't sit there and pretend you'd simply treat something like this as "only a book" or something equally benign.

So like it or not, her thinking right now is that she is protecting something she gave life to. She wants to keep it evolving in such a way as she sees fit, and if that includes taking down projects that might potentially ruin whatever purity she's striving to keep, then she'll do it.

Note that I am NOT giving her a pass on this, because there are times when it's overstepping your bounds and attempting to use some kind of obscure law or money to uphold something, even if you know you're wrong. I imagine strummer is the most educated on legal matters in this thread, so I'm going to take whatever he says as the most directly true.

This means that - unlike Lucas, since that seems to be the popular comparison in here - she really is doing more harm than good. She's going after some fans who probably aren't doing anything honestly wrong, she's making (probably) asinine requests simply for her own good, and she's trying to run everything about her creation as if she honestly has the ability to do that.

But don't say she hasn't tried to appease some fans or appeal to her fanbase amiably. What about the near endless amount of talks and speeches she had to give in order to answer questions about all sorts of things last year? She could just as easily avoid doing such things, but at least she does and has and probably still will. I guess everyone is only looking at all the dumb things she's doing, and maybe they overpower whatever good she's done. I don't know.

Maybe she is money grubbing at this point and has let greed overtake the original intent for her writing, which was pure survival. I don't really know since I'm not paying as close enough attention as some others seem to be.[/quote]

While it's nice that you tried to soften the blow for JK, she's not a victim here.

Many of the ppl on this board consider themselves lucky to work a job they sort-of like so they can make enough money to pay the bills. So you'll excuse us if it's hard to dredge up sympathy for a woman who makes millions upon millions of dollars to work a fantasy job writing make-believe books simply because she can't micromanage every fan-made character discussion and plot summary.

I really don't care what crazy ideas are going through her mind, what she is doing is not right and it's causing some big fans some big legal fees that are probably fairly painful. It's a very greedy, very ugly struggle for more power and money - I think we all have become jaded enough to expect this from basketball players and politicians, it's just disappointing that writers of childrens books are starting to act the same way.
 
I'm not so much "softening the blow" as I am trying to inject some sense of what she's probably thinking into this thread, instead of having a knee jerk schadenfreude reaction. That big of a project for that long leaves an emotional impact, which is why people don't like seeing their favorite sitcoms end, why a favorite band breaking up sucks, etc. Even if it's something entirely and totally miscellaneous in the grand scheme of things, it still carries gravity.

I'm not even calling her a victim, so I don't know where you got that from. I'm not even asking for sympathy, or empathy, or any other kind of compassionate pathos. I'm simply saying that everyone here is so hellbent on assuming she has absolutely no honest connection to what she's done outside of the money angle, and frankly, that's just a childish way of looking at it.

Besides, I completely agree - I'd love to have a job someday that makes me happy and does something I find creatively challenging and rewarding, rather than the most likely scenario of being chained up in a giant corporation that can drop my ass to give its CEO a nicer car to drive for a month before he tires of it and buys another. I'm even willing to take a lower paycheck home just to find my job rewarding and worthwhile.

And I'm not even agreeing with her tactics, since I mention that I think she is overstepping boundaries simply because she has the bills to legally crush anything she doesn't like, and likewise can use that same regulatory girth to enforce whatever demands she wants.

You need to quit acting like I'm sticking up for her. I'm just saying that everyone is saying things like "Wah wah whine away you crybaby bitch" as if that was all she was doing.

You have a big and predictable habit of crying foul about any big corporation trying to do anything to protect any of its assets, no matter how justified or insane their methods or reasons are, so I'm not going to pretend like I'm going to change your mentality that you've made overwhelmingly clear in lots of posts.
 
[quote name='Strell']You have a big and predictable habit of crying foul about any big corporation trying to do anything to protect any of its assets, no matter how justified or insane their methods or reasons are, so I'm not going to pretend like I'm going to change your mentality that you've made overwhelmingly clear in lots of posts.[/quote]

Hmmm, I only remember bringing up issues such as Sco vs. Linux, Sony's fake PSP ads, and RIAA vs everything good in this world (Before you jump on it, last one is hyperbole. Barely. ;))

If there's some corporate interest you think I've unfairly critiqued I would appreciate you specifically referencing it instead of making vague generalizations designed to 'swiftboat' my position.

Anyway, I understand you were mostly playing devil's advocate and trying to paint the issue from her perspective. But what's the point, she's wrong and she is acting like a spoiled prat, and I see nothing wrong in calling her out on it.
 
[quote name='camoor']Hmmm, I only remember bringing up issues such as Sco vs. Linux, Sony's fake PSP ads, and RIAA vs everything good in this world (Before you jump on it, last one is hyperbole. Barely. ;))
[/quote]

This is a funny opening paragraph considering:

If there's some corporate interest you think I've unfairly critiqued I would appreciate you specifically referencing it instead of making vague generalizations designed to 'swiftboat' my position.
Click to expand...

I don't give one shit about SCO vs Linux and have never said anything about it. As for fake PSP ads, I don't even know if I've said anything about those. I remember the ones that were in the UK that - to an American audience - could have been called racist, and even then I didn't care.

As for the RIAA, I doubt you'd ever find me sticking up for them, since I think they are about as close as we get to hell on earth in the form of corporate entities. Hyperbole or not, my position about music sharing is a largely unpopular one, but at no time do I think the RIAA is ever right in its decisions, since they are basically what I said about Rowling - they use their money to push around the little guy to get what they want, knowing full well it's a David vs Goliath situation, except that this time Goliath is in a tank which itself is in a tank.

You're so hot on evidence, maybe I should ask you to bring some up about me on the above matters.

Anyway, I understand you were mostly playing devil's advocate and trying to paint the issue from her perspective. But what's the point, she's wrong and she is acting like a spoiled prat, and I see nothing wrong in calling her out on it.
Click to expand...

Criminy.

I am not disagreeing on that part.

I was pointing out that people pretend she has no emotional connection here, and that's just ignorant to pretend.
 
I can't believe someone used the phrase "Lucas" and "artistic vision" in the same sentence earlier. I mean really?? Changing the character arc in his own movie(han vs. greedo) and (to quote Obi Wan in the original SW novel), "Let us simply say that the Force is simply something a Jedi must deal with. While it has never been properly explained, scientists have theorized it is an energy field generated by living things." Or it is midi-chlorians.

Sorry to turn this into a giant dump on Lucas, but the guy has sold his artistic vision out in better than anyone else in history. And I don't actually believe that he does let OTHERS print SW encyclopedias. The few that I saw on amazon were all printed by Del Rey who currently prints all the rest of the adult SW books. He is VERY protective of his works/characters. And even if he isn't/wasn't that doesn't make JK Rowling a "god damn soul-less piece of shit cunt" or a "bitch".
 
[quote name='Illini Jeeper']I don't read Harry Potter books nor have I seen the movies. I can appreciate the fact that she was able to write and be successful. HOWEVER, this just seems to further exemplify how power-hungry she's gotten once success started. Look at the development of the Harry Potter section of Universal Studios Islands of Adventure, which started from a power-control issue with Disney.

Source

You know you have a problem when the Disney Company (which I'm a fan of) won't even take on your ideas, which would make them a ton of money, because of how much control you demand.

I guess my problem with it is that she wouldn't be where she is today without her fans and it seems like she's putting herself above them. She's willing to start a frivolous legal action against a book publishing company over ideas and she's putting her "baby" in what will always be a 2nd tier theme park just so she can have creative control. I might even look the other way on the theme park thing if she had some sort of experience in that particular industry. It just seems like a really arrogant move to basically say that I alone know what's best for my characters and you people with years of successful operations don't have a clue.

Even George Lucas knew Disney was the place to go with his Star Wars sagas. Talk about success... a ride in almost every Disney theme park around the world (Disneyland, Walt Disney World, Tokyo Disney, and Disneyland Paris), a "Jedi Training Academy" attraction for younger kids in Disneyland and Disney World, boatloads of merchandise sales, and 4 weekends in June devoted to the series called "Star Wars Weekends." Lucas knew which company could do it best and retained some control, but otherwise stood back and let the pros do their jobs.[/QUOTE]

Yes Disney has tops for the theme park but if Universal got to it they could've matched her. In fact I would argue if Universal would follow their trademark in movies, a sense of childlike wonderment as well as being larger then life, they wouldn't have been bought by NBC.
Name me WHAT movies after Jurassic Park you can easily think up the name to. Universal, if it was smart, would've bought the movie rights to Jumanji, Zathura, Harry Potter, maybe The Last Mimzy and maybe Polar Express. These movies ALL fit Uni's image and would've kept the brand first and foremost in people's minds.
I'd like to know what idiot at Universal was in charge when Jumanji came around because whenever I thought of Jumanji I thought of Universal and I remember talkig to another who thought the same. It's actually Sony. The IDIOCY! I mean seriously.
 
If she was so smart, creative and intelligent shouldn't she have been able to kill herself when was going through her depressed phase? I mean...come on, get it right
 
Wow, there is a lot of hate on these boards. Also, according to the OP, if Harry Potter is "pop trash," then I shudder to imagine what Lost could be categorized as. Don't get me wrong, it's an enjoyable show, but it is simply watchable garbage with a few moments of brilliance such as the recent episode, "The Constant." From the beginning, at least Harry Potter had direction and the balls to have an end in sight. In anime terms, Lost is fucking Naruto.
 
[quote name='o2012o']Wow, there is a lot of hate on these boards. Also, according to the OP, if Harry Potter is "pop trash," then I shudder to imagine what Lost could be categorized as. Don't get me wrong, it's an enjoyable show, but it is simply watchable garbage with a few moments of brilliance such as the recent episode, "The Constant." From the beginning, at least Harry Potter had direction and the balls to have an end in sight. In anime terms, Lost is fucking Naruto.[/quote]

To be fair, Lost Season 1 had suspenseful moments that reminded me of Hitchcock. It also has not finished it's story arc, if they can pull out an ending comparable to the "Sixth Sense" then I doubt you'll be able to find any creditable reviewer who shares your opinion.

It's funny, "watchable garbage with a few moments of brilliance" is typically how I view Southpark.

Admittedly I judge novels and tv shows differently. TV shows I usually watch just for fun (with rare exceptions such as the brilliant "Carnivale"). If I invest in a novel, I want to come away with more then a teenage witchcraft soap opera that relies too heavily on deus ex machina.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top